The Demands of Occupy Wall Street

[WinePusher]

People at occupy wall street have released unofficial lists of demands here and there. There are apparently many out there and they don't seem to correspond to eachtother, but here's one unofficial list of demands:

-Demand 1: Restoration of the living wage. This demand can only be met by ending Freetrade by re-imposing trade tariffs on all imported goods entering the American market to level the playing field for domestic family farming and domestic manufacturing as most nations that are dumping cheap products onto the American market have radical wage and environmental regulation advantages. Another policy that must be instituted is raise the minimum wage to twenty dollars an hr.
-Demand 2: Institute a universal single payer healthcare system. To do this all private insurers must be banned from the healthcare market as their only effect on the health of patients is to take money away from doctors, nurses and hospitals preventing them from doing their jobs and hand that money to wall st. investors.
-Demand 3: Guaranteed living wage income regardless of employment.
-Demand 4: Free college education.
-Demand 5: Begin a fast track process to bring the fossil fuel economy to an end while at the same bringing the alternative energy economy up to energy demand.
-Demand 6: One trillion dollars in infrastructure (Water, Sewer, Rail, Roads and Bridges and Electrical Grid) spending now.
-Demand 7: One trillion dollars in ecological restoration planting forests, reestablishing wetlands and the natural flow of river systems and decommissioning of all of Americas nuclear power plants.
-Demand 8: Racial and gender equal rights amendment.
-Demand 9: Open borders migration. anyone can travel anywhere to work and live.
-Demand 10: Bring American elections up to international standards of a paper ballot precinct counted and recounted in front of an independent and party observers system.
-Demand 11: Immediate across the board debt forgiveness for all. Debt forgiveness of sovereign debt, commercial loans, home mortgages, home equity loans, credit card debt, student loans and personal loans now! All debt must be stricken from the Books. World Bank Loans to all Nations, Bank to Bank Debt and all Bonds and Margin Call Debt in the stock market including all Derivatives or Credit Default Swaps, all 65 trillion dollars of them must also be stricken from the Books. And I dont mean debt that is in default, I mean all debt on the entire planet period.
-Demand 12: Outlaw all credit reporting agencies.
-Demand 13: Allow all workers to sign a ballot at any time during a union organizing campaign or at any time that represents their yeah or nay to having a union represent them in collective bargaining or to form a union.

http://toddkinsey.com/blog/2011/10/08/o ... f-demands/

1) What do you make of these demands? Are they reasonable or unreasonable?
2) In a list of demands seperate from this list, OWS protestors have expressed disapproval towards the ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commision. Do you agree or disagree with the ruling?
3) Although absent from the list of demands, OWS have expressed disdainment towards what they percieve to be a growing gap between the top 1% of society and the remaining 99% of society. What is the truth regarding wealth and income inequality?

[Iolo]

Decent people? Give me a break. They're a public menace, they've vandalized the neigborhoods they protest in, and they're guilty of public displays of indecencies. Most of them are young people, in their late teens and early twenties. And it amazes how they can take weeks out of their lives to sit in a park and protest about something they don't understand. I wish I could join them, but I have a job and go to school. I guess these people don't.

You'd have been happy under the Soviet Union or Mediaeval Popery. How wonderful to believe whatever you are told by Power and hate anyone who opposes it. We call that 'serfdom' in our language.

[JohnPaul]

I have a couple of ideas to submit which I suspect will not be very popular.

The top one percent which you condemn so loudly pays 40 percent of all taxes which support our country, while more than half of the 99% pay no taxes at all. Who is contributing more to the country? I submit that America needs that one percent far more than that one percent needs America. They could easily pick up their assets and go lounge on a beach in Tahiti and let the rest of us stew in our own juices while our starved corpses rotted in the streets and our society collapsed into the Stone Age.

While you are contemplating that idea, here is another. You probably believe in the principle, ONE MAN/ONE VOTE. Why not apply the same principle to taxes and distribute taxes equally? After all, this is a democracy and we are all equal, right? I don't mean the same tax RATE, but an equal dollar AMOUNT. Think of that while you are shouting about equality.

Incidently, I am not among the one perecent. Only a few times in my working life did my income reach the top 48%, but I had the same opportunities as Bill Gates.

John

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 35:

The top one percent which you condemn so loudly pays 40 percent of all taxes which support our country, while more than half of the 99% pay no taxes at all. Who is contributing more to the country? I submit that America needs that one percent far more than that one percent needs America.

And therein lies the rub. The richest 1% don't need America, in a time when America needs them the most. That so many wealthy and well off individuals would forsake the country that provided their wealth is, if only to me, a disgusting and unconsionable state of affairs.

They could easily pick up their assets and go lounge on a beach in Tahiti and let the rest of us stew in our own juices while our starved corpses rotted in the streets and our society collapsed into the Stone Age.

Is that not what is occuring as I type?

While you are contemplating that idea, here is another. You probably believe in the principle, ONE MAN/ONE VOTE. Why not apply the same principle to taxes and distribute taxes equally? After all, this is a democracy and we are all equal, right? I don't mean the same tax RATE, but an equal dollar AMOUNT. Think of that while you are shouting about equality.

The problem here is that so many of the poor have only the one dollar to start with.

Incidently, I am not among the one perecent. Only a few times in my working life did my income reach the top 48%, but I had the same opportunities as Bill Gates.

It's good to hear you was born into a wealthy family.

Some others of us weren't.

[Goat]

I have a couple of ideas to submit which I suspect will not be very popular.

The top one percent which you condemn so loudly pays 40 percent of all taxes which support our country, while more than half of the 99% pay no taxes at all. Who is contributing more to the country? I submit that America needs that one percent far more than that one percent needs America. They could easily pick up their assets and go lounge on a beach in Tahiti and let the rest of us stew in our own juices while our starved corpses rotted in the streets and our society collapsed into the Stone Age.

While you are contemplating that idea, here is another. You probably believe in the principle, ONE MAN/ONE VOTE. Why not apply the same principle to taxes and distribute taxes equally? After all, this is a democracy and we are all equal, right? I don't mean the same tax RATE, but an equal dollar AMOUNT. Think of that while you are shouting about equality.

Incidently, I am not among the one perecent. Only a few times in my working life did my income reach the top 48%, but I had the same opportunities as Bill Gates.

John

Now, I have to object to your wording.. you are missing a word in the 'pay no tax' .. .. that is "pay no income tax. That includes much of the 1% , because many of them have their income from long term investments, rather than a salary.

This not so little characteristation sort of shows you are not using proper information

[JohnPaul]

JoeyKnothead wrote:

It's good to hear you was born into a wealthy family.

Some others of us weren't.

?????? My father owned a small farm, so we managed to survive the Great Depression without starving, but never did my father's income rise above what is now called the "poverty level." If that is what you call a wealty family, I cannot even imagine your own family's position of absolute abject degrading poverty! Fortunately, the government did not tell us back then what the poverty level was, so I enjoyed a happy childhood in spite of it.

When I retired, my income was about $42,000 per year, at that time slightly above the national median (50%) level. At some personal sacrifice, I had managed to accumulate some IRAs and had put the maximum 6% of my wages into my employer's (evil corporation) 401K plan. I was the only one in my department to do so. The others thought I was crazy, and preferred to spend their money on new cars and vacation trips. When I retired, I had managed to accumulate enough investments (evil stock market) to provide a small safety cushion, but I assure you my income now is only slightly above the so-called poverty level.

Please tell us all about your terrible suffering at your abject poverty level.

John

[nursebenjamin]

I have a couple of ideas to submit which I suspect will not be very popular.

The top one percent which you condemn so loudly pays 40 percent of all taxes which support our country, while more than half of the 99% pay no taxes at all. Who is contributing more to the country? I submit that America needs that one percent far more than that one percent needs America. They could easily pick up their assets and go lounge on a beach in Tahiti and let the rest of us stew in our own juices while our starved corpses rotted in the streets and our society collapsed into the Stone Age.

I would argue that the one percent has already done this, except they are residing in gated-communities, being entertained at exclusive clubs, as well as lounging around places such as Tahiti.

By the way, your 40 percent number isn't true.[1]

[JohnPaul]

I have a couple of ideas to submit which I suspect will not be very popular.

The top one percent which you condemn so loudly pays 40 percent of all taxes which support our country, while more than half of the 99% pay no taxes at all. Who is contributing more to the country? I submit that America needs that one percent far more than that one percent needs America. They could easily pick up their assets and go lounge on a beach in Tahiti and let the rest of us stew in our own juices while our starved corpses rotted in the streets and our society collapsed into the Stone Age.

I would argue that the one percent has already done this, except they are residing in gated-communities, being entertained at exclusive clubs, as well as lounging around places such as Tahiti.

By the way, your 40 percent number isn't true.[1]

OK, 39 percent then.

Your apparent belief that the one percent of achievers is somehow obligated to support the rest of us smacks more of envy than objective thought, and reminds me a little of the famous Communist ideal: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." This failed in the real world because it removed all individual incentive to achieve. Why work when any excess you produce will be taken away from you and given to those who do not work?

John

[nursebenjamin]

While you are contemplating that idea, here is another. You probably believe in the principle, ONE MAN/ONE VOTE. Why not apply the same principle to taxes and distribute taxes equally? After all, this is a democracy and we are all equal, right? I don't mean the same tax RATE, but an equal dollar AMOUNT. Think of that while you are shouting about equality.

Ok, I thought about that for two seconds and decided that everyone paying equal dollar amounts would not be very fair. Look, I'm glad that some people struck it rich. But Elizabeth Warren says it best: "There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own." "I want to be clear. You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for. You hired workers the rest of us paid to educate. You were safe in your factory because of police-forces and fire-forces that the rest of us paid for. You didnt have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory " and hire someone to protect against this " because of the work the rest of us did.

Now look, you built a factory and it turned into something terrific, or a great idea. God bless " keep a big hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is, you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along.

[nursebenjamin]

Your apparent belief that the one percent of achievers is somehow obligated to support the rest of us smacks more of envy than objective thought, and reminds me a little of the famous Communist ideal: "From those according to their ability, to those according to their need." This failed in the real world because it removed all individual incentive to achieve. Why work when any excess you produce will be taken away from you and given to those who do not work?

Except, the rich were able to achieve what they did because of the society that we created. I see nothing wrong with asking the rich to pay society back a small portion of their wealth.

And I dont see anyone not willing to work. What I see are senior citizens going without lifesaving medications, children having their education opportunities slashed, our dinosaur infrastructure crumbling, and families pulling down 2-3+ jobs and still able to make a dent in their debts. Whatever we are doing in this country isnt working very well for the average Joe.

[JohnPaul]

While you are contemplating that idea, here is another. You probably believe in the principle, ONE MAN/ONE VOTE. Why not apply the same principle to taxes and distribute taxes equally? After all, this is a democracy and we are all equal, right? I don't mean the same tax RATE, but an equal dollar AMOUNT. Think of that while you are shouting about equality.

Ok, I thought about that for two seconds and decided that everyone paying equal dollar amounts would not be very fair. Look, I'm glad that some people struck it rich. But Elizabeth Warren says it best: "There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own." "I want to be clear. You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for. You hired workers the rest of us paid to educate. You were safe in your factory because of police-forces and fire-forces that the rest of us paid for. You didnt have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory " and hire someone to protect against this " because of the work the rest of us did.

Now look, you built a factory and it turned into something terrific, or a great idea. God bless " keep a big hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is, you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along.

The "hired workers" were paid the market value for their work, perhaps much more if they were unionized. As for public benefits such as roads, schools, police and fire protection, etc, they apply to everyone, not just the one percent. Why should the one percent pay any more per capita for them than the 99 percent do?
It is OK to ask them to pay based on actual usage, but anything more is discrimination and robbery. The half of the population who pay no taxes on average use much more of public services than the rich do. Let them pay for their own share of usage!

John